Featured Rotary returns

if they can get the range to 100ev and another 200wankle, they might be on to something.

 

Gretchen Mazda, stop trying to make "fetch" the Wankel happen, it's not going to happen.

(Mazda is known for showing tons of Wankel concepts that never make it to reality, because even if they can make a Wankel barely meet emissions and efficiency standards, they can apply the same technology to a piston ICE and get even better results.)

 

i know, but it's so romantic, and makes great pub. a lot of folks are rooting for them.

 

This is why I like Mazda. They don't follow the crowd. They had a turbo 4 family sedan in the 2000's. When everyone started ditching their V6 for turbo, Mazda decided, "nah SkyActiv Atkinson cycle engine is good." And it is. Good fuel economy and good driving dynamics. Unfortunately, the buying public, me included, have not supported Mazda by buying their products. It's a shame.

My brother had a rotary RX7. It was a blast to drive. It drank almost as much oil as it did gasoline. Got like 13 mpg out of the what 1.0 liter rotary? I don't remember the engine size but it was a hoot to drive. My sister had a Mazda 5 and it too consumed way more fuel than it's 4 cylinder engine should. Hats off to those Wankel dreamers at Mazda!

 

My uncle is a Mazda/Wankel enthusiast and has owned some variety of RX series since the 80s. Yes they burn oil and gas and yes he has experienced engine failure at ~ 100K several times but man are they fun to drive and that engine note is so unique. He is hanging on to his 2012 RX-8 and drives it exclusively on the weekends; he is even trying to import a Spirit-R version from Japan (but they are very rare). I think it's cool to merge a Wankel & battery but we'll see how well that approach works in practice.

 

to veer off course just a bit, mazda needs a bread and butter car, like camry/accord/altima.

 

They do have one in that class, the Mazda6. Nobody buys it because it doesn't have enough sound insulation (for light weight and therefore better handling), and there's no V6 or turbo 4 option. So, everyone wanting a sporty midsize buys the Accord V6, everyone else buys a Camry, Accord 4-cylinder (or V6 if they just want the one with "everything"), Altima, Fusion, Malibu, Sonata, or Optima.

However, they are selling quite a few CX-5s. And, I think that's where the "bread and butter" midsize sedan buyer is moving - instead of the Camry, the RAV4. Instead of the Accord, the CR-V. Instead of the Altima, the Rogue. Instead of the Fusion, the Escape. Instead of the Malibu, the Equinox. Instead of the Sonata, the Tucson or Santa Fe Sport. Instead of the Optima, the Sorento Sportage, got the wrong one.

 

could be, i'd have to see the numbers trending.

 

As a range extender, the Wankel might find its niche. The smaller size and lighter weight can allow a larger battery pack. With longer EV range, the lower fuel efficiency and higher emissions have less impact in the car's typical drive cycle.

Audi was playing around with one in an A1 PHEV. The entire genset sat between the rear wheels.

Mazda's niche is sportier models to what to large companies offer. Straying from that could hurt them. Not every company out there needs to be big to be a success.

 

needs and wants are two completely different things. i have no idea what their corporate goal is, but size can be liberating, or stifling.

 

Actually, that's an excellent point, right there.

Twice, they tried to go mainstream with the 626/Mazda6, and it bit them hard.

The 1998-2002 "wide-body" 626 for the US market was a fairly large-scale flop, because they tried to make a Camry. Camry buyers didn't want to buy a Mazda, Mazda buyers didn't want to buy a Mazda Camry clone.

Similarly, the 2009-2012 US-market Mazda6 was a flop, because Camry buyers still didn't want to buy a Mazda, and it wasn't even a good Camry clone this time around, and Mazda buyers still didn't want to buy it.

 

it wasn't a very good car.

 

Part of the reason for the success of the SkyActiv suite in technology advancement is because Mazda is small. They didn't have the resources to start their own hybrid program to meet stricter fuel efficiency targets.

That success helped them in gaining partnerships with Toyota, who has bought more into Mazda recently. As conationals, Mazda is happier with this than they were with Ford. The two compliment each other in terms of strengths, and Mazda is probably what Toyota really wanted in Scion.

 

a fellow employee had one, nothing but problems. finally dumped it in disgust. just one example though.
my mx5 was built like a brick ship house. 12 years, no problems and no recalls.

 

Yeah, I had the 1600LX in '86 and it was a great car. Not exactly zippy acceleration, but cruised very nicely, roomier than I expected and handling was ok if not great!. The 2 liter GLX was better.

 

How much longer will it be before Toyota doesn't have partnerships with most of the smaller or poorer-performing Japanese car makers? It seems as though they will soon lack partnerships only with Nissan and Honda

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.

 

WOW this thread brought back memories. My 1973 RX-2. That was a long time ago.